In this New York Times article (Jan 27th 2011) the reporter slowly wobbles away from calling those who toppled the Banana Republic in Lebanon mythical anti west monsters, but.. he still uses sectarian labels, obviate Lebanese nationalism and fixates on the colonial idea that Lebanon must be Syria's colony, or somebody's. The reporter also speaks of how is the US to have clout in Lebanese. Isn't the premise of decolonization that the west would work with other countries, and not manipulate them?
Baby steps!
In this older article they acknowledge that GMA fought off the Syrian occupation "then was exiled", but they skip that he led the only underground, and pacifist liberation movement until 2005.
Granted he visited dictatorships, but is shunning these neighbors, or communicating with them the answer? It's colonial to deny democratic middle easterns the chance to influence neighboring pre-democraties, and that starts with... visits.
Baby steps!
In this older article they acknowledge that GMA fought off the Syrian occupation "then was exiled", but they skip that he led the only underground, and pacifist liberation movement until 2005.
Granted he visited dictatorships, but is shunning these neighbors, or communicating with them the answer? It's colonial to deny democratic middle easterns the chance to influence neighboring pre-democraties, and that starts with... visits.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Write a comment: